State legislators should restore integrity and fairness to Idaho’s legislative process
Idaho’s legislative process is broken.
The strength of our democracy lies in the ability of citizens to participate in their government. Idaho’s erratic and opaque legislative process is increasingly cutting citizens out of the policymaking process and treating input as an inconvenience. What we are witnessing is not simply dysfunction — it is a pattern that raises serious concerns about abuse of power and the deliberate sidelining of Idahoans’ voices.
How do we fix a broken process? It starts with leaders in the Legislature who genuinely value constituent input and are willing to address the most harmful practices. Idahoans deserve:
48 hours’ notice of hearings so everyone, including professionals in clinics and essential services, can make arrangements to attend.
Stable agendas that are not changed at the last minute.
Agendas that reflect a realistic number of bills, rather than overloading committee hearings with more legislation than can reasonably be heard.
Meaningful opportunity to sign up and testify.
Time and respect given to expert testimony.
Sufficient committee time to hear from those who have shown up in good faith.
Additional time and care for bills that carry civil or criminal penalties, ensuring thorough and informed public input.
A legislative process that respects both transparency and deliberation — one that does not suspend the rules to rush controversial legislation through in the final days of the session.
A legislative process that prioritizes quality over quantity — one that does not allow an overload of poorly drafted bills that require fixes for errors and omissions in the years that follow.
During the recently adjourned session, Idahoans were often given inadequate notice to register and prepare testimony. Committee agendas shifted without warning, forcing constituents to scramble to rearrange their schedules and lives, or shutting them out entirely. Even when people took time off work, arranged child care, and traveled long distances to attend hearings, many were not given the opportunity to speak. Those participating remotely faced similar barriers.
Members of our organizations also experienced — and witnessed — committee practices that felt dismissive of public participation, including overloaded agendas and last-minute changes to the order of testimony that appeared to prioritize out-of-state lobbyists over Idahoans. We are not an inconvenience; we are a vital part of the policymaking process.
Ours is not simply a procedural concern. It has real and immediate consequences for the quality of the laws under which we are governed.
Consider House Bill 822 requiring professionals to notify parents if their child seeks a social gender transition, with potential penalties of up to $100,000. The bill moved quickly through both House and Senate Judiciary and Rules committees, yet very few Idaho clinicians — those directly responsible for safeguarding children’s well-being — were allowed to testify in person. Instead, time was made for out-of-state voices, including a parent from California and an attorney representing a national think tank.
In a column that ran in the Idaho Capital Sun, one clinician said he came prepared with 10 pages of testimony and a 108-page index of evidence-based research. He had canceled appointments to be present and share this information, but he was never called to speak. The same was true for Noreen Womack, a Boise pediatrician and co-founder of Idaho Children Are Primary, who registered to testify in both chambers but was never recognized.
With the potential of a $100,000 penalty and the loss of professional licenses, excluding frontline professionals from the conversation is not just troubling; it is irresponsible. As was noted in the Idaho Capital Sun column, there is something deeply concerning about invoking “child protection” while silencing those whose professional duty is to protect children.
When people are denied the opportunity to be heard, the result is not order — it is distress. Idaho State Police were asked to remove distraught attendees from one hearing, a direct consequence of a process that left many people feeling ignored and dismissed. This exclusion produces frustration, grief and a breakdown in trust. When this process is repeated in more than 80 days of a legislative session, many Idahoans watch sine die with anger, exhaustion and disillusionment.
The public square, run by this Legislature, is, for many of us, a dysfunctional and unhappy place.
Beyond the immediate impacts, this approach reflects a broader pattern: a consolidation of power at the state level that sidelines local voices and erodes local control. Decisions that affect communities across Idaho are being rushed through without adequate input from those communities. Policies with far-reaching consequences are advancing without meaningful grass roots support.
Regardless of where one stands on policy, the legislative process must be fair, transparent and accessible. Unforeseen circumstances may require committee chairs to rearrange agendas and shorten testimony lists, but these actions should be rare, not, as they are in many committees, as standard operating procedure.
Public comment is not a formality; it is essential to informed decision making. Yet in Idaho, the legislative process has increasingly become a spectator sport, even for citizens who are eager to participate.
To our legislative leaders: Tt is long past the time to restore meaningful public engagement and ensure Idahoans have a real voice in the process.
Signed,
Diane Garvey, Idaho Children Are Primary
Betty Richardson and Louise Seeley, Idaho Women Forward
Jean Henscheid, League of Women Voters of Idaho
Mary Mosley and Bonnie Pfaff, American Association of University Women
Dee Childers and Sandy Tregarthen, SW Idaho NOW